• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Methylfolate vs Folic Acid: Myths vs. Facts

PeterPositive

Senior Member
Messages
1,426
Despite being compound heterozygous for the MTHFR genes?
Yes, that is correct. Which tells me... it's not that clear-cut how the MTHFR defect works.
I brought my homocysteine down to ~15 from 98 (!!) in 8 months with so called "inactive" B vitamins. By adding methyl-folate and methyl-B12 I was able to push it down further... around 11.

My folic acid dosage was 400mcg/day initially, then 800mcg. B12 was 800mcg, B6 10mg. At the time I was unaware of my double MTHFR defect and so was my doctor.
 

TheChosenOne

Senior Member
Messages
209
The funny thing is that FDA has approved it, if FDA approves something, it's a red flag, it means it causes more harm than good most of the time (They usually never approve the healthy stuff and stuff that works). and also they do not approve methyl folate or methyl cobalamin which are natural but do approve synthetic stuff like Folic Acid or cyano cobalamin which do really more harm than good.
Lol. Exactly this. Remember that suicide and mass murder pills are FDA approved.
 

alicec

Senior Member
Messages
1,572
Location
Australia
However I had horrible crash when I once tried to take a active b complex

Maybe you started with too high a dose. Many people are very sensitive to these supplements and need to start with a tiny dose and increase slowly.

I can tolerate hydroxocobalamin, folic acid and inactive b6

Maybe you tolerate them because they are doing very little.

There does seem to be a significant number of people who can't process folic acid and inactive cobalamins. In my own case, parallel blood tests for folate and cobalamins and a urinary OAT test convinced me to try the active forms. I had only ever supplemented the small amounts of folic acid and cyanocobalamin in a standard B complex preparation. My blood tests showed very high folate and cobalamin (way above the normal range) but the OAT test showed significant functional deficiency of folate and B12.

I interpreted this to mean that the inactive vitamins were simply accumulating in blood and not getting into cells.

Once I started supplementing methyl folate and methyl and adenosyl B12 the OAT test normalised.

There is no reason to think that inability to process folic acid has anything to do with MTHFR snps. The problem is much more likely to lie with other aspects of folate metabolism and/or transport. It may not have anything to do with snps but rather with more general metabolic problems. Anyone with CFS/ME is likely to have plenty of these.
 
Messages
1
The funny thing is that FDA has approved it, if FDA approves something, it's a red flag, it means it causes more harm than good most of the time (They usually never approve the healthy stuff and stuff that works). and also they do not approve methyl folate or methyl cobalamin which are natural but do approve synthetic stuff like Folic Acid or cyano cobalamin which do really more harm than good.

Just curious what deplin is then? An unapproved by the fda prescription methylfolate? hmm. Also you would think if it's approved by the FDA it does actually work so that they can capitalize on making money from it and squashing any competition.
 

mgk

Senior Member
Messages
155
I stumbled on this topic again recently and noticed that Ben Lynch and the creator of this video had an interesting debate in the comments section. Copying it here for posterity:

lNuQwkc.png

KZKnIbq.png
 

mgk

Senior Member
Messages
155
I don't think either of them "won;" they both made some good points. I sympathize with Lynch's argument that methylfolate is the form found in food. Why ingest the synthetic version when you can take the form that our bodies are used to getting?

I also sympathize with Chaney's argument that folic acid is much better studied. Methylfolate is theoretically better but it doesn't have the decades of evidence that folic acid does. There have been several examples in the past where a vitamin found in food behaved differently than the exact same compound found in an isolated supplement.

I don't see any reason to think methylfolate would work differently but I wouldn't want to take that gamble when the stakes are so high and its superiority has yet to be proven. Imagine substituting methylfolate for folic acid in a prenatal and then finding out that the child got spina bifida anyway because of some obscure biochemical technicality. You never know until you test it on people.
 

dannybex

Senior Member
Messages
3,561
Location
Seattle
Thanks for that @mgk. It'll take a week or so for me to read and re-read it, but I appreciate your posting it. And am impressed you were able to take such an enormously long screencap of all of it! :woot: